Jason Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firewithin Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kal-El814 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Take that man below and clap him in irons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jwheel86 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Yeah, if Dems win, the AG needs to charge them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwinIon Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 2 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: Predictable I feel like this pretty accurately shows why Trump thinks never-Trump Republicans are so dangerous. Right now he can count on effectively unanimous support within his party, no matter what he does. If the idea that you could be a Republican that doesn't support Trump spread at all, he'd be in pretty serious trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSoxFan9 Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Republicans would be kinda of awesome if they weren’t trying to end humanity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarSolo Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 Live action obstruction of justice is a sight to behold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted October 23, 2019 Share Posted October 23, 2019 5 hours ago, 2user1cup said: Don't worry, we'll white wash this history too I would imagine this what the McCarthy era was like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signifyin(g)Monkey Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 The statement Meadows gave about breaking the security rules is almost completely unintelligible: Quote There's no cameras or phones in the SCIF, so I think that those phones actually went in, just because everybody went in,” Meadows told reporters. “I can tell you I actually collected phones and brought them back out. You certainly want a secure environment but at the same time I think everybody wants to hear exactly what's going on.” Um...what? 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, Signifyin(g)Monkey said: The statement Meadows gave about breaking the security rules is almost completely unintelligible: Um...what? He's trying to cover for his co-conspirators here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Giuliani is seeking a defense attorney: CNN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Spartan fetishists are weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mclumber1 Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 7 minutes ago, thewhyteboar said: Spartan fetishists are weird. Few people on the planet have a more punchable face than this guy. Look up the word "Douche" in the dictionary and it's just a picture of this dude... no explanation or definition, just his portrait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said: Few people on the planet have a more punchable face than this guy. Look up the word "Douche" in the dictionary and it's just a picture of this dude... no explanation or definition, just his portrait. It's a face that screams "My father will hear of this!" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 6 minutes ago, thewhyteboar said: It's a face that screams "My father will hear of this!" He simultaneously looks like the bully and the bullied from an 80's teen drama. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneticBlueprint Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 1 hour ago, thewhyteboar said: Spartan fetishists are weird. I'm pretty sure he's talking about the sequel movie. Specifically when Eva Green filmed a softcore porno with that one bad actor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osxmatt Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted October 24, 2019 Author Share Posted October 24, 2019 This shit is just a fucking game to these people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skillzdadirecta Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 2 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said: This shit is just a fucking game to these people The GOP has pulled shit like this before... and they accuse the Left of using paid protestors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted October 24, 2019 Author Share Posted October 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signifyin(g)Monkey Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 The Economist has an interesting article that previews some of the tricks McConnell will likely pull if/when this reaches the Senate: Quote An impeachment trial has several trappings of a court trial: lawyers, evidence, jurors, verdict. But the proceedings and judgment are fundamentally political. A removed official has no appeal. And there are no set rules of evidence, no due-process requirement and of course no gag rule for jurors—senators must stay mum inside the chamber but can talk freely to the press. Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina who testified at the Clinton impeachment, says that Republicans could change the rules by majority vote. Democrats could try to filibuster any change, but the filibuster could itself be nixed by a simple majority. Yet there may be little need for Mr McConnell to resort to that. Instead he could choose to limit the witnesses or evidence Democrats could introduce; allow Mr Trump “to assert privilege to prevent anything from being disclosed that the president does not wish to be disclosed”; or “impose a tougher burden of proof”—like the criminal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”—to tip the balance in Mr Trump’s favour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spork3245 Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Quote An impeachment trial has several trappings of a court trial: lawyers, evidence, jurors, verdict. But the proceedings and judgment are fundamentally political. A removed official has no appeal. And there are no set rules of evidence, no due-process requirement and of course no gag rule for jurors—senators must stay mum inside the chamber but can talk freely to the press. Michael Gerhardt, a law professor at the University of North Carolina who testified at the Clinton impeachment, says that Republicans could change the rules by majority vote. Democrats could try to filibuster any change, but the filibuster could itself be nixed by a simple majority. Yet there may be little need for Mr McConnell to resort to that. Instead he could choose to limit the witnesses or evidence Democrats could introduce; allow Mr Trump “to assert privilege to prevent anything from being disclosed that the president does not wish to be disclosed”; or “impose a tougher burden of proof”—like the criminal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”—to tip the balance in Mr Trump’s favour. @Signifyin(g)Monkey‘s quote but with it changed to plain text so it’s readable if you’re using a theme with a white BG 4 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaysWho? Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema- Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 Again, McConnell won't be leading the Senate during impeachment hearings. All that stuff would have to pass through John Roberts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CitizenVectron Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 33 minutes ago, Anathema- said: Again, McConnell won't be leading the Senate during impeachment hearings. All that stuff would have to pass through John Roberts. I've seen comments that McTurtle has wide latitude to decide what "presides over" means—that he can decide that having Roberts literally just sitting in the room is sufficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ort Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-leading-trump-impeachment-probe-bring-their-own-baggage This is the big lead story on foxnews.com. I mean, this is crazy pathetic even by their low shit standards. Just insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anathema- Posted October 24, 2019 Share Posted October 24, 2019 4 hours ago, Jason said: I've seen comments that McTurtle has wide latitude to decide what "presides over" means—that he can decide that having Roberts literally just sitting in the room is sufficient. In a technical sense the Senate majority can change its own rules governing the powers of the presiding officer but that's something he'll have to do and it will still have to go through while Roberts presides. I don't see Roberts allowing nonsense that will force him to choose anything on obviously partisan grounds, he's built a career out of throwing up a legal bulwark to pretend cases aren't decided on a partisan basis .. I don't see how he would allow it here and I don't see McConnell trying to push him around either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted October 25, 2019 Author Share Posted October 25, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewhyteboar Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 To the GOP, democracy means only Republicans get to vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b_m_b_m_b_m Posted October 25, 2019 Author Share Posted October 25, 2019 1 hour ago, thewhyteboar said: To the GOP, democracy means only Republicans get to vote. Or exercise legitimate power. See the illegal impeachment, not confirming Obama's judges in an election year and then saying they will go ahead and do the same for Trump's judges next year, WI GOP removing the power of the governor to veto gerrymandered Congressional maps, etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSpreader Posted October 25, 2019 Share Posted October 25, 2019 Will the Walrus take out the Toddler? Stay tuned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.